5 ms·

> Why on Earth is this a good model? Because it worked. Millions of lives have been saved - 1% of 1.3B is 13M people. That's 1/5 of Italy. Are there better mo

> Why on Earth is this a good model? Because it worked. Millions of lives have been saved - 1% of 1.3B is 13M people. That's 1/5 of Italy. Are there better models? Maybe. But there are also much worse models, as I suspect we might soon find out in the US [1]. Personally I'd much rather take the Chinese model for the next few months than risk me and my family dying or going bankrupt over the next few months. And, instead of thinking that China could "afford to take the economical hit", consider the economic impact of 13M people suddenly dying. At this point, there's definitely going to be a hit to the economy. It's just going to be either A) from stricter lock downs and government aid, or B) from more people dying due to overrun hospitals. It might not be a wash in terms of the dollar amount, but it's clear which option will save more lives. [1] Comparing China and US response: - China has made treatment (not just testing) for coronavirus free for everyone. In the US...better hope you have good insurance. - Tests performed per million people: China 2,800, US 5 - China is ordering banks to increase loans to SMBs rather than hoarding cash to protect themselves. It has rolled out a bunch of policies to support SMBs and employees. The US...well, not much so far. Sources: https://www.sciencealert.com/here-s-how-many-coronavirus-tests-per-capita-have-been-completed https://www.sciencealert.com/here-s-how-many-coronavirus-tes... https://qz.com/1813181/china-is-taking-pleasure-in-us-mishandling-of-coronavirus/ https://qz.com/1813181/china-is-taking-pleasure-in-us-mishan... https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3052474/coronavirus-china-grants-banks-extra-funding-spur-loans-hard https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3052474/c... https://www.china-briefing.com/news/chinas-latest-regional-measures-to-support-smes-during-coronavirus-outbreak/ https://www.china-briefing.com/news/chinas-latest-regional-m...

antpls 7y ago
> Because it worked. Millions of lives have been saved - 1% of 1.3B is 13M people. That's 1/5 of Italy. This is an inacurrate estimation. I guess your figure of 1% is from South Korea case fatality rate. The confirmed cases represent a biased sample of the population, and the mortality rate could be lower in reality (but not higher). > consider the economic impact of 13M people suddenly dying. The mortality is mainly for 70+ years old people, who are already not in the workforce anymore. Those numbers cannot help us to evaluate or to compare one state's measure versus another state's decision
- sdkaufman 7y ago
  > This is an inacurrate estimation. Sure, the actual number will likely be different for each country / state / city, but doesn't really matter for the sake of the argument. I was using 1% as a lowball number. Official mortality rate from the WHO is 3-4%; some studies say 2%, Italy is reporting 7%. And for those 80+, current data suggests a mortality rate of 1/7 - not far off from a round of Russian roulette. So if you have 4 grandparents who are 80+, there's a ~60% chance at least one will die if the disease spreads through our population in the next few months. > The mortality is mainly for 70+ years old people, who are already not in the workforce anymore. Firstly, if hospitals are overrun (which is the way we're headed), people of all ages will die preventable deaths. Hospitals in the US are already postponing elective surgeries. Secondly, it's simply not true that older people don't contribute to the economy. The elderly still consume food, housing, health care etc., and a negative demand shock is a recipe for recession. For example, think about what happens to nursing homes or physical therapists if a large percentage of older people die. Or what happens to local housing prices if lots of homes are suddenly put up for sale because elderly owners died en masse. And many older people continue to work and volunteer (e.g. just look at our president, congressmen, and senators), and that some grandparents help with child care (like in my family right now). Sources: - https://time.com/5798168/coronavirus-mortality-rate/ https://time.com/5798168/coronavirus-mortality-rate/ - https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/lamvo/coronavirus-death-rates-age-charts-us-china https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/lamvo/coronavirus-death... - https://nypost.com/2020/03/12/heres-why-the-coronavirus-death-rate-is-so-high-in-italy/ https://nypost.com/2020/03/12/heres-why-the-coronavirus-deat... - https://www.economicshelp.org/macroeconomics/economic-growth/cause-recession2/ https://www.economicshelp.org/macroeconomics/economic-growth...
  - psychlops 7y ago
    Here's a quote from the first link you have: "That means the total number of reported cases is very likely an underestimate—and by not counting many mild or asymptomatic cases, we’re likely overestimating the disease’s overall mortality rate." It is not possible to know the mortality rate with the information we have. Extrapolating that dubious number into a prediction of deaths is not a meaningful exercise.
syshum 7y ago
>>Personally I'd much rather take the Chinese model for the next few months than risk me and my family dying or going bankrupt over the next few months. Always makes me sad when Americans willing give up essential liberty to purchase perceived safety. Personally I would much rather look the situation rational, may the assessment of risk for myself, then choose on my own what course of action(s) I will take. Not have those actions dictated and imposed on me by an authoritarian government. I would rather lose my health or my life than to lose my liberty
- mft_ 7y ago
  Even if it's temporary?
  - syshum 7y ago
    Lost liberty is never temporary, once lost it is lost forever. Government never roll back control they have ceased. Look at the after effects of 9/11, those provisions where to be "temporary" yet have been renewed endlessly and will always be renewed
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
- sdkaufman 7y ago
  It's not just about your health or your life. This is what R0 means - even if you end up fine after getting the disease, you're going to transmit it to other people who may end up dying because of you. In other words, it's also your liberty vs other people's lives. Are you going to be the grandson who kills his grandma? Or the employee who kills the CEO? Or the Trump supporter who ends up helping elect Biden?
  - dependenttypes 7y ago
    The grandma and the CEO can quarantine themselves at home if they so wish.

antpls 7y ago

> Because it worked. Millions of lives have been saved - 1% of 1.3B is 13M people. That's 1/5 of Italy. This is an inacurrate estimation. I guess your figure of 1% is from South Korea case fatality rate. The confirmed cases represent a biased sample of the population, and the mortality rate could be lower in reality (but not higher). > consider the economic impact of 13M people suddenly dying. The mortality is mainly for 70+ years old people, who are already not in the workforce anymore. Those numbers cannot help us to evaluate or to compare one state's measure versus another state's decision

sdkaufman 7y ago
> This is an inacurrate estimation. Sure, the actual number will likely be different for each country / state / city, but doesn't really matter for the sake of the argument. I was using 1% as a lowball number. Official mortality rate from the WHO is 3-4%; some studies say 2%, Italy is reporting 7%. And for those 80+, current data suggests a mortality rate of 1/7 - not far off from a round of Russian roulette. So if you have 4 grandparents who are 80+, there's a ~60% chance at least one will die if the disease spreads through our population in the next few months. > The mortality is mainly for 70+ years old people, who are already not in the workforce anymore. Firstly, if hospitals are overrun (which is the way we're headed), people of all ages will die preventable deaths. Hospitals in the US are already postponing elective surgeries. Secondly, it's simply not true that older people don't contribute to the economy. The elderly still consume food, housing, health care etc., and a negative demand shock is a recipe for recession. For example, think about what happens to nursing homes or physical therapists if a large percentage of older people die. Or what happens to local housing prices if lots of homes are suddenly put up for sale because elderly owners died en masse. And many older people continue to work and volunteer (e.g. just look at our president, congressmen, and senators), and that some grandparents help with child care (like in my family right now). Sources: - https://time.com/5798168/coronavirus-mortality-rate/ https://time.com/5798168/coronavirus-mortality-rate/ - https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/lamvo/coronavirus-death-rates-age-charts-us-china https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/lamvo/coronavirus-death... - https://nypost.com/2020/03/12/heres-why-the-coronavirus-death-rate-is-so-high-in-italy/ https://nypost.com/2020/03/12/heres-why-the-coronavirus-deat... - https://www.economicshelp.org/macroeconomics/economic-growth/cause-recession2/ https://www.economicshelp.org/macroeconomics/economic-growth...
- psychlops 7y ago
  Here's a quote from the first link you have: "That means the total number of reported cases is very likely an underestimate—and by not counting many mild or asymptomatic cases, we’re likely overestimating the disease’s overall mortality rate." It is not possible to know the mortality rate with the information we have. Extrapolating that dubious number into a prediction of deaths is not a meaningful exercise.

syshum 7y ago

>>Personally I'd much rather take the Chinese model for the next few months than risk me and my family dying or going bankrupt over the next few months. Always makes me sad when Americans willing give up essential liberty to purchase perceived safety. Personally I would much rather look the situation rational, may the assessment of risk for myself, then choose on my own what course of action(s) I will take. Not have those actions dictated and imposed on me by an authoritarian government. I would rather lose my health or my life than to lose my liberty

mft_ 7y ago
Even if it's temporary?
- syshum 7y ago
  Lost liberty is never temporary, once lost it is lost forever. Government never roll back control they have ceased. Look at the after effects of 9/11, those provisions where to be "temporary" yet have been renewed endlessly and will always be renewed
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
sdkaufman 7y ago
It's not just about your health or your life. This is what R0 means - even if you end up fine after getting the disease, you're going to transmit it to other people who may end up dying because of you. In other words, it's also your liberty vs other people's lives. Are you going to be the grandson who kills his grandma? Or the employee who kills the CEO? Or the Trump supporter who ends up helping elect Biden?
- dependenttypes 7y ago
  The grandma and the CEO can quarantine themselves at home if they so wish.